Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What does AMD offers over Intel?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 5, 2011 4:31:43 PM

Because Im used to using Intel, I never check AMD options. But Im sure the company must offer something, otherwise it would be bankrupted. Can someone please give me some light on AMD products and exclusive features?

I mean, It seems pretty easy on intel side, i3 dual threaded, i5 quad, i7 quad threaded, hows AMD?

Besides I know itnel puts some exclusive technology like the SSD cache thing, what about AMD?

More about : amd offers intel

October 5, 2011 4:45:01 PM

leandrodafontoura said:
Because Im used to using Intel, I never check AMD options. But Im sure the company must offer something, otherwise it would be bankrupted. Can someone please give me some light on AMD products and exclusive features?

I mean, It seems pretty easy on intel side, i3 dual threaded, i5 quad, i7 quad threaded, hows AMD?

Besides I know itnel puts some exclusive technology like the SSD cache thing, what about AMD?

well for amd its even easier in terms of finding out how many cores there is with am3 platforms as you jus lokk for x2,x3, x4 or x6 so say a athlon x2 it will be dual core and a x4 would be quad. also the phenom is just athlon without the 6mb l3 cache. but their new series of apu are harder to explain as its quite a mix and will keep me waffling on for ages but they do have a advantage tho as their intergrated graphics are very good and the A8's are even enough to play most games at 720p. although if you get a am3 tho you will get advantage of being more upgradeable, plus its cheaper compared to similarly performing intel's most of the time. but thats it really, apart from that, cpu wise amd hasnt really got anything over intel unless you see it price wise as for the same price amd probably offers better performance but amd hasnt got really anything to compet past the 2500k atm.
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2011 4:45:59 PM

Bottom line? You get what you pay for. Period.

For $100, you get $100 worth of performance. For $300, you get $300 worth of performance, regardless of brand.

That's the way it's always been, that's the way it'll always be.
Related resources
October 5, 2011 4:47:41 PM

I think the biggest things AMD has to offer is much better integrated graphics and cheaper prices.

Compare an AMD Phenom II X4 955 (3.2GHz) at $120 to the i3-2100 at $125. While the i3 can beat the Phenom II in some tests, the AMD chip can be overclocked giving it better performance. The A8-3850 can play WoW without a dedicated graphics card at decent resolution and settings and only costs $140.

Also, AMD motherboards seem to be a bit cheaper than Intel motherboards. I haven't done a thorough comparison, but that seemed to be the case when I was looking for parts for my current system.

Obviously when you go up to the i5 and i7's AMD currently can't compete, but they do have nice chip offerings that compete with Intel's chips from the Atom to the i3.
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2011 4:48:31 PM

AMD's strengths for the past few years has been performance to price ratio. They lost a bit of that to the second gen i-series (Sandy Bridge) but are still competitive in low cost overclocking (with unlocked multipliers on $87 CPUs vs $200+ for Intel).

AMD is aiming to take back the performance crown with their new Bulldozer architecture (comes out Oct 12th, supposedly) featuring desktop CPUs with 8 real cores and 4.2GHz stock speeds (w/ turbo).
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2011 4:50:42 PM

AMD allows regular joe's to be able to buy a decent processor at a good price.

I don't know about any exclusive features...but having AMD in the market allows Intel to keep their prices sane.

Imagine what it would be like if we all just had Intel. We would be paying through the nose for very little performance.

This is kind of what happened with the Netburst architecture. Intel got sloppy, and AMD was able to dominate with their Athlon 64 processor back in the day (even though intel had a clock advantage).

Also the new BullDozer CPU should help out with AMD's current CPU lineup, as clock for clock the Phenom II does not even compare with Intel's latest gen processor.
a c 265 à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
October 5, 2011 4:51:23 PM

As a rule, amd competes on price and number of cores.

For heavily multithreaded apps, 6 and 8 cores is very good.
Such units are priced well. and makes it attractive for multi threaded apps.

But the amd architecture is not nearly as good as sandy bridge, so they get much less work per clock.
Gamers need two or three fast cores, so sandy bridge shines there.

On overclocking, the ams chips come clocked relatively high, so there is somewhat limited upside headroom.
But theyall can be overclocked.
The only sandy bridge chips that can be overclocked are the 2500K and 2600K. They can be highly overclocked.

At the lower end, both sandy bridge and llano have integrated graphics. The llano has particularly good graphics for low end gamers.
But either has sufficient graphics power for displaying HD movies.
From a cpu capability, the sandy will handily beat llano in the same price range.
October 5, 2011 5:24:40 PM

Im simply a gamer and Ill probably never use integrated graphics. Is there a CPU withough integrated graphics, and therefore, better performance per price?
a c 265 à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
October 5, 2011 5:37:36 PM

leandrodafontoura said:
Im simply a gamer and Ill probably never use integrated graphics. Is there a CPU withough integrated graphics, and therefore, better performance per price?


If you use discrete graphics, any included integrated graphics is irrelevant.

Today, the 2500K is the best gamer at the $200 price point, and arguably at any price.

If you are looking at a lesser cost cpu, then you mostly get a similar performance per dollar from either amd or intel.
October 5, 2011 6:11:04 PM

Ok, so Im sticking with Intel on my next build..unless oct 12 change anything
!